Proponents of remote work highlight several advantages. Firstly, the elimination of commuting saves employees both time and money, contributing to improved work-life balance. Secondly, employers can access a wider talent pool unrestricted by geographical boundaries. Thirdly, studies suggest that many individuals are more productive in a personalised, distraction-controlled home environment than in a bustling open-plan office.

For decades, the conventional workplace meant commuting to a central office, sitting at a designated desk, and interacting face-to-face with colleagues. However, the rapid advancement of digital communication technologies, coupled with global events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, has fundamentally altered this paradigm. Working from home (WFH), once a perk reserved for a few, has become a mainstream arrangement for millions of knowledge workers worldwide.

10. digital communication technologies 11. boundary blurring 12. dedicated 13. hybrid

Nevertheless, the shift is not without challenges. The blending of professional and personal life within the same physical space often leads to ‘boundary blurring’. Without a clear separation between work hours and home life, many remote workers report increased stress and a higher risk of burnout. Furthermore, the lack of spontaneous, informal interactions can impede creativity and weaken corporate culture. Managers also express concerns about monitoring performance and ensuring data security across multiple home networks.

Time Allowed: 20 minutes Questions: 13 Reading Passage Home: The New Workplace

Home The New Workplace Ielts Reading Answers Practice

Neal Pollack

Bio: Neal Pollack is The Greatest Living American writer and the former editor-in-chief of Book and Film Globe.

6 thoughts on “‘What We Do In The Shadows’ Season 2: A Jackie Daytona Dissent

  • Home The New Workplace Ielts Reading Answers Practice
    August 1, 2020 at 1:22 pm
    Permalink

    I love how you say you are right in the title itself. Clearly nobody agrees with you. The episode was so great it was nominated for an Emmy. Nothing tops the chain mail curse episode? Really? Funny but not even close to the highlight of the series.

    Reply
    • August 2, 2020 at 3:18 pm
      Permalink

      Dissent is dissent. I liked the chain mail curse. Also the last two episodes of the season were great.

      Reply
  • Home The New Workplace Ielts Reading Answers Practice
    November 15, 2020 at 3:05 am
    Permalink

    Honestly i fully agree. That episode didn’t seem like the rest of the series, the humour was closer to other sitcoms (friends, how i met your mother) with its writing style and subplots. The show has irreverent and stupid humour, but doesn’t feel forced. Every ‘joke’ in the episode just appealed to the usual late night sitcom audience and was predictable (oh his toothpick is an effortless disguise, oh the teams money catches fire, oh he finds out the talking bass is worthless, etc). I didn’t have a laugh all episode save the “one human alcoholic drink please” thing which they stretched out. Didn’t feel like i was watching the same show at all and was glad when they didn’t return to this forced humour. Might also be because the funniest characters with best delivery (Nandor and Guillermo) weren’t in it

    Reply
    • November 15, 2020 at 9:31 am
      Permalink

      And yet…that is the episode that got the Emmy nomination! What am I missing? I felt like I was watching a bad improv show where everyone was laughing at their friends but I wasn’t in on the joke.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *